This year's biggest category is the SUV Over $40,000 class, with six models fighting across a breadth of price points and sizes.

Last year the title was taken out by the Ford Territory turbo diesel TS RWD - which was not just the standout in its class, but was also strongly backed when it came time to cast votes for the overall Car of the Year. In the end, it was only bested by Mercedes-Benz's silky C-Class sedan.

The Australian-built Territory has been a firm favourite among Aussie families since its release in 2004, thanks to its clever interior, car-like dynamics and a strong petrol engine lifted from the Falcon sedan.

Advertisement

That same petrol engine's unappealing thirst was also the Territory's Achilles heel, and a 2.7-litre V6 turbo diesel engine belatedly installed last year was the frugal final piece of the jigsaw. Sales have been strong ever since.

The locally-built Territory will be measured this year against a trio of Germans covering compact (Audi Q3) and large (Mercedes-Benz ML250, Volkswagen Touareg) segments, and a pair of twin SUVs from South Korean brands Kia and Hyundai.

The Audi Q3 model we've chosen is the 2.0 TFSI, which has a 2.0-litre petrol engine producing 125kW/280Nm, a seven-speed dual-clutch automatic transmission and all-wheel-drive.

We picked it as the range's sweet spot, given a cheaper, diesel-powered, front-wheel-drive model is offered only with a manual transmission that rules it out for most buyers.

In many ways the Q3 is a Russian doll to the larger Q5 and Q7, with similar interior appointments and driving experience, albeit shrunken into a smaller package.

The BMW X1 is a similar story, with its compact dimensions and undeniable resemblance to its bigger siblings, X3 and X5. A recent mid-life update included new engines, the choice of an eight-speed auto and an updated suite of measures to promote efficient driving. But the changes weren't quite deemed enough against the Q3 with which it competes.

Going toe to toe with the Territory in the heavyweight class are the Benz ML250 and Volkswagen's Touareg. Both are immediately on the back foot without the ability to match the Territory's handy third row of seating that means it can double as an occasional people-mover.

But the Benz, which received a major makeover earlier this year, punches back with a more powerful turbo diesel engine that's also appreciably more economical than the Ford's. Cabin refinement has been significantly improved over the previous model and the ride/handling compromise is class competitive. The Benz is easily the most expensive car here (at $81,400) but compensates with a high-quality feel and an impressive list of standard inclusions.

The Touareg 150TDI was ousted from this category by a solitary vote last year, and a major criticism – the lack of a reversing camera – has been addressed. An update also added leather upholstery, 12-way electrically adjustable front seats and bi-xenon headlights for no additional cost. It will again be equipped with a 3.0-litre V6 turbo diesel engine matched to an eight-speed auto that uses an official 7.2L/100km. It remains priced at $62,990.

The South Korean pairing are basically twins under the skin.

Both the Kia Sorento SLi and the Hyundai Santa Fe Elite models we've chosen are all-wheel-drive; both are powered by a 2.2-litre turbo diesel with 145kW/436Nm; both come with a six-speed automatic transmission as standard; both have fuel use claims of 7.6L/100km; and both have seven seats as standard.

But there is a slight difference in price. The Kia Sorento SLi is priced at $43,990, while the version with satnav is priced at $45,490, giving it a slight advantage over the Santa Fe ($45,990).

We've driven both models ahead of DCOTY testing, and found it hard to split the two. The Kia tended to have a slightly smoother ride, and while its interior is also improved over the previous model, the Hyundai's sparkly new insides raised a few more eyebrows than its sibling.

While there are six SUVs in contention in this category, several others missed the cut.

The Infiniti FX large soft-roader missed our final cut. Although new to Australian buyers, it has been available in overseas markets for about three years. It's a classy drive, but is missing a few things we expect to find in its elevated price range. These include a frontal crash avoidance system, head-up-display and an electric park brake.

Meanwhile, the revised Lexus RX range packs in customary value and pampering equipment but hasn't moved far enough forward dynamically, with the tall body still prone to wallowing in corners and bump absorption still lacking the class benchmarks. The new four-cylinder RX270 is also underwhelming and not as fuel efficient as we'd hoped in real world driving.

A new variant of the Volvo XC60, the front-wheel-drive D4, also impressed, but just missed the cut.

Performance Statistics

0-60 km/h

0-100 km/h

0-400 m

Top speed

Ford Territory TS diesel RWD

3.2

10.7

17.8

132

Hyundai Santa Fe Elite diesel AWD

4.5

9.6

17.1

132

Kia Sorento SLi diesel AWD

4.6

10.1

17.4

130

Audi Q3 2.0 TFSI FWD

4.5

9

16.7

139

Volkswagen Touareg 150TDI

4.7

9.4

17

138

Mercedes-Benz ML250 diesel AWD

4.7

10.2

17.4

132

PREVIOUS WINNERS:

2011 Ford Territory TS TDCi RWD

2010 Volvo XC60

2009 Volvo XC60

2008 Toyota LandCruiser

2007 Toyota LandCruiser

2006 Audi Q7

64 comments so far

Lucky for the other finalists that the Grand Cherokee is classified as a 4wd, otherwise it could (in Limited or even better Overland guise) been a strong contender for this category as well.

Commenter

RS3200

Location

Newcastle

Date and time

October 26, 2012, 1:27PM

Given you have access to the Internet, why dont you google "Jeep moose test" and have a look at the results. After that, think about your family and then decide.

Commenter

Bush Basher

Location

Greensborough 7 Elevan

Date and time

November 06, 2012, 2:32PM

Bush Basher. I did. If you can find some more references other than what I came up with I'd like to see them (for my own safety). Otherwise I can only go by the article(s), which suggest that the test was stacked for effect:

"Chrysler Group engineers are investigating a Swedish magazine's evaluation of the 2012 Grand Cherokee. During the evaluation, the publication was able to capture images of a Grand Cherokee on two wheels as it performed an extreme maneuver in an overloaded condition.

Advised of this event by the magazine, Chrysler Group engineers made numerous attempts toreproduce the wheel-lift in a properly loaded vehicle. Extensive testing produced no such result.

A subsequent evaluation was conducted by the magazine July 8 in Sweden and witnessed by Chrysler Group engineers. Three vehicles performed 11 runs on a course prepared by the magazine. None reproduced the original event.

The uncharacteristic result was obtained using a vehicle loaded beyond its weight specifications. The Grand Cherokee's weight limitations are clearly stated on the vehicle and in the owner's manual."

Another reference that I found claims that the same test was then repeated "by the German magazine Auto Motor und Sport. The publication ran the Grand Cherokee through conditions supposedly identical to those in a test conducted by the Swedish magazine Teknikens Varld, which saw the SUV nearly roll over after an abrupt lane change. After AMS loaded the Jeep with a varying number of passengers and the maximum amount of cargo, it said the vehicle remained stable with all four wheels on the ground during abrupt maneuvers."

Commenter

BeenThereDoneThat

Location

Melbourne

Date and time

November 06, 2012, 3:39PM

I'm not a Jeep fan and so don't need the burden of proof that you would require. I do admit that the pricing compared with similarly specified tugs does look good but I do wonder how they are achieving that price point.

Are you suggesting that the original testers had an agenda?

Commenter

Bush Baher

Location

Date and time

November 06, 2012, 4:49PM

The Jeep Cherokee is highly over-rated. Very poor build quality, questionable reliability. You can only trade trade on reputation earned by a totally different vehicle in WW2 for so long. Sooner or later you have to come up with the goods.

Commenter

doh

Location

Date and time

November 06, 2012, 5:16PM

Sorry BeenThereDoneThat but I can't help myself. I just can’t see that this magazine has an axe to grind against Jeep, especially since they passed the previous version. This Mag famously failed a Toyota Hilux and the A-Class Mercedes. Both those manufacturers redesigned aspects of the vehicles following those tests.It's true that there was a minor overloading of the vehicle-2% which equates to 58 kg's in a 3 ton car. Jeep has not produced any video evidence to refute the claims and in any case, I would prefer an independent test.See this link http://www.4wdhandbook.com/rmp/blog/jeep-grand-cherokee-fails-elk-test-rollover-moose-test

Commenter

Bush Basher

Location

Greenborough 7 Eleven

Date and time

November 06, 2012, 7:55PM

The Cherokee test was reproduced (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaYFLb8WMGM). Easily. Multiple times, this time with burst tyres. On paper it is a great car that I would have considered, but now I could not. It was loaded to 490Kgs (132 under the limit). The clip shows other cars executing the moose test, the difference is night and day.

Commenter

dave

Location

Date and time

November 07, 2012, 7:07AM

@ beentheredonethat. The test was done again with three different jeeps with Chrysler officials present and same result. They couldn't keep the 4 wheels on the ground and blew 7 tyres.This was even with using a lighter load tha normally required.Cutting and pasting a response from Chrysler is hardly convincing.

Commenter

fjh

Location

Date and time

November 07, 2012, 7:20AM

Jeep might want to get a 5 star ANCAP rating first before winning any awards.

Commenter

DC

Location

Sydney

Date and time

November 07, 2012, 8:12AM

Four wheel drives are the scourge on the world todayThey have the best chance to maim and kill us and the bull bar even improves their chances of that.They obstruct your vision whether they are parked or on the road improving your chances of having an accident.While they are at it they tear up the roads and consume more fuel than that one in a time of finite resources should.The owners are indeed selfish and thoughtless individuals who have no care for anybody else on the road